• Journal of Life Science
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.314-319
• /
• 2018

We analyzed QTLs for alkali-related digestion by using 120 population crossed Cheongcheong and Nagdong derived from anther culture (CNDH). The DNA markers located in the QTLs gene were selected and applied to existing cultivars. As a result of the investigation of the alkali decay degree, brown rice of Cheongcheong and Nagdong was 1.9 and 1.6, respectively, and the CNDH was $3.79{\pm}2.01$, and the distribution of variance was distributed to 7.0-1.0. The milled rice of Cheongcheong and Nagdong was 5.6 and 4.1, respectively. The mean of the CNDH was $4.86{\pm}1.55$, and the distribution of variance was distributed to 7.0-2.0. Variation distribution curves showed continuous variation that was close to non-normal distribution. In the QTLs analysis, qBRA2, qBRA6, and qBRA11 were mapped in 1-2 replications of brown rice. QHRA2-1, qHRA2-2, qHRA2-3, qHRA3, and qHRA8 were mapped in the first replication. QHRA2-1, qHRA2-2, qHRA2-3 and qHRA3 were mapped in the second replicates. And mapped to qHRA5 in 4 replicates. These were found on chromosome 2, 3, 6, 8 and 11, respectively. The phenotypic variations of qBRA2, qBRA6, and qBRA11 on the chromosomes of brown and milled rice were 1-9%. The polymorphism was analyzed for 12 types of the japonica type and six types of the indica type, based on the nine markers found in the QTLs analysis of alkali digestion. Chromosome 11, RM27258, was selected to determine the segregation ratio, which shows the difference in size by the band pattern. The results of this study will be used as basic data for the development of high-quality rice cultivars.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Industrial Safety Conference
• /
• 2003.05a
• /
• pp.241-246
• /
• 2003

대형 시스템의 안전에 미치는 인적요인의 영향이 매우 크기 때문에, 시스템의 안전성을 정확히 평가하기 위해서는 인적요인에 대한 체계적인 평가가 선행되어야 한다. 원자력 분야에서는 발전소 안전성에 미치는 인적오류를 평가하기 위하여 인간신뢰도분석(Human Reliability Analysis : HRA)을 수행해 왔다. 그러나 데이터의 부족과 인적행위 메카니즘에 대한 이해 부족으로 인하여 아직까지 HRA 수행에는 많은 불확실성이 존재한다. 최근 HRA를 포함한 안전성 평가 결과가 원자력발전소 설계 및 운전에 관련된 의사결정에 주요 정보로 활용되면서 HRA의 신뢰성을 높이기 위한 연구 개발 노력이 활발히 진행 중에 있다.(중략)

• Proceedings of the Korean Nuclear Society Conference
• /
• 1997.10a
• /
• pp.747-752
• /
• 1997

고리 3,4호기 및 영광 1,2호기 PSA Ⅰ단계 수행 결과 ATWT에 대한 노심 손상 확률은 다른 사건에 비해 상대적으로 적어 소홀히 취급될 수 있으나 전체적인 노심 손상 확률 저감을 위해 본 연구에서는 ATWT 사건 중 터빈 정지시 원자로 정지불능을 선정하여 HRA를 수행하였다. HRA 수행의 첫째 과정은 위에서 선정한 사건에 대해 시나리오를 가정하고 이를 4개 그룹의 주제어실 운전원들에게 적용하여 모의 제어반을 이용한 훈련을 실시하였으며 운전원 조치 과정중의 행동관찰, 훈련결과, 개별 면담 등을 통해 국내 운전원 특성에 맞는 HRA의 기초자료를 얻었다. 두 번째 과정은 위의 결과 및 절차서에 근거하여 PSF 고려 유무에 따라 실패 확률의 정량적 평가와 불확실성 분석을 수행하여 ATWT에 대한 HRA 수행 자료로 활용 가능하도록 하였으며, 끝으로 ATWT 영향 완화를 위한 대안을 제시함으로서 노심 손상 확률을 감소시키기 위한 기초가 되도록 하였다.

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.53 no.2
• /
• pp.376-385
• /
• 2021

Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) has improved its elemental technologies used for assessing external events since the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station Accident in 2011. HRA needs to be improved for analyzing tasks performed under extreme conditions (e.g., different actors responding to external events or performing operations using portable mitigation equipment). To make these improvements, it is essential to understand plant-specific and scenario-specific conditions that affect human performance. The Nuclear Risk Research Center (NRRC) of the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI) has developed an HRA guide that compiles qualitative analysis methods for collecting plant-specific and scenario-specific conditions that affect human performance into "narratives," reflecting the latest research trends, and models for analysis of tasks under extreme conditions.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Railway
• /
• v.9 no.5 s.36
• /
• pp.532-538
• /
• 2006

The railway human reliability analysis(R-HRA) plays a role of identifying and assessing human failure events in the framework of the probabilistic risk assessment(PRA) of the railway systems. This study introduces a case study that was performed to select an appropriate R-HRA method. Three HRA methods were considered in the case study: (1) the K-MRA(THERP/ASEP-based) method, (2) the HEART method, (3) the RSSB-HRA method. Two case events were selected based on the review of the railway incidents/accidents, which include (1) a real-end collision event, which occurred on the railway between the Gomo and Kyungsan stations in 2003, (2) the signal passed at danger(SPAD) events, which are caused from a variety of factors. The three HRA methods were applied to both case events, and then the strengths and limitations of each method were derived and compared with each other from the viewpoint of the applicability of a HRA method to the railway industry.

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.45 no.2
• /
• pp.151-164
• /
• 2013

A key input for the assessment of Human Error Probabilities (HEPs) with Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) methods is the evaluation of the factors influencing the human performance (often referred to as Performance Shaping Factors, PSFs). In general, the definition of these factors and the supporting guidance are such that their evaluation involves significant subjectivity. This affects the repeatability of HRA results as well as the collection of HRA data for model construction and verification. In this context, the present paper considers the TAsk COMplexity (TACOM) measure, developed by one of the authors to quantify the complexity of procedure-guided tasks (by the operating crew of nuclear power plants in emergency situations), and evaluates its use to represent (objectively and quantitatively) task complexity issues relevant to HRA methods. In particular, TACOM scores are calculated for five Human Failure Events (HFEs) for which empirical evidence on the HEPs (albeit with large uncertainty) and influencing factors are available - from the International HRA Empirical Study. The empirical evaluation has shown promising results. The TACOM score increases as the empirical HEP of the selected HFEs increases. Except for one case, TACOM scores are well distinguished if related to different difficulty categories (e.g., "easy" vs. "somewhat difficult"), while values corresponding to tasks within the same category are very close. Despite some important limitations related to the small number of HFEs investigated and the large uncertainty in their HEPs, this paper presents one of few attempts to empirically study the effect of a performance shaping factor on the human error probability. This type of study is important to enhance the empirical basis of HRA methods, to make sure that 1) the definitions of the PSFs cover the influences important for HRA (i.e., influencing the error probability), and 2) the quantitative relationships among PSFs and error probability are adequately represented.

• Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science
• /
• v.101 no.4
• /
• pp.547-557
• /
• 2012

This study purposed to estimate the forest biomass using k-Nearest Neighbor (k-NN) algorithm. Multiple data sources were used for the analysis such as forest type map, field survey data and Landsat TM data. The accuracy of forest biomass was evaluated with the forest stratification, horizontal reference area (HRA) and spatial filtering. Forests were divided into 3 types such as conifers, broadleaved, and Korean pine (Pinus koriansis) forests. The applied radii of HRA were 4 km, 5 km and 10 km, respectively. The estimated biomass and mean bias for conifers forest was 222 t/ha and 1.8 t/ha when the value of k=8, the radius of HRA was 4 km, and $5{\times}5$ modal was filtered. The estimated forest biomass of Korean pine was 245 t/ha when the value of k=8, the radius of HRA was 4km. The estimated mean biomass and mean bias for broadleaved forests were 251 t/ha and -1.6 t/ha, respectively, when the value of k=6, the radius of HRA was 10 km. The estimated total forest biomass by k-NN method was 799,000t and 237 t/ha. The estimated mean biomass by ${\kappa}NN$method was about 1t/ha more than that of filed survey data.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Industrial Safety Conference
• /
• 2003.10a
• /
• pp.225-230
• /
• 2003

원자력발전소의 안전성을 평가하는 확률론적 안전성평가(PSA) 기법 내에서 인간신뢰도분석(HRA： Human Reliability Analysis)은 파악된 사고경위 중 부적절한 인적행위사건에 대한 분석 및 평가를 담당하고 있다. 여러 HRA 전문가들이 제기하고 있는 기존 PSA HRA의 개선점 중 정성적 분석 관점에서 중요하게 고려되는 사항을 정리하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 운전원의 진단 및 상황판단 또는 의사결정 단계에서의 특정한 오류 유발사항(error producing conditions or error forcing context)을 분석할 수 있는 방법이 필요하며, 둘째, 다양한 인적오류사건의 고려이다.(중략)

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.88-98
• /
• 2000

More than half of all incidents in large complex technological systems, particularly in nuclear power or aviation industries, were attributable in some way to human erroneous actions. These incidents were largely due to the human engineering deficiencies of man-machine interface (MMI). In nuclear industry, advanced computer-based MMI designs are emerging as part of new reactor designs. The impact of advanced MMI technology on the operator performance, and as a result, on plant safety should be thoroughly evaluated before such technology is actually adopted in nuclear power plants. This paper discusses the applicability of human reliability analysis (HRA) to support the design review process. Both the first-generation and the second-generation HRA methods are considered focusing on a couple of promising HRA methods, i.e., ATHEANA and CREAM, with the potential to assist the design review process.

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.37 no.2
• /
• pp.159-166
• /
• 2005

Human reliability assessment (HRA) is conducted on the unspoken premise that 'human error' is a meaningful concept and that it can be associated with individual actions. The basis for this assumption it found in the origin of HRA, as a necessary extension of PSA to account for the impact of failures emanating from human actions. Although it was natural to model HRA on PSA, a large number of studies have shown that the premises are wrong, specifically that human and technological functions cannot be decomposed in the same manner. The general experience from accident studies also indicates that action failures are a function of the context, and that it is the variability of the context rather than the 'human error probability' that is the much sought for signal. Accepting this will have significant consequences for the way in which HRA, and ultimately also PSA, should be pursued.